Was Liz Stride's scarf used by her murderer?

[Garza]

My opinion :-)

Liz and her killer were in dutfields yard in the dark
She takes the mints out to have one
The killer pulls the collar in the neck hard with his left hand, and slams her onto the ground her shoulders hitting first (brusing found). This would mean the killer was in the yard deeper than Liz.
He covers her mouth with left, she tries to turn away, foetal poistion, he cuts her throat and windpipe with right.
This can all be done within 15 seconds.
Killer hears cart coming into distance, he hides in dark yard assuming the cart will pass, instead it comes into the yard itself. Cart guy (name escapes me), doesnt have a latern, as he has to light a match - which could not light whole yard. Killer waits til he goes into club to tell others til her makes his mistake.

[lynn cates]

cachous

Hello Garza. Would not such a violent slam cause the cachous to be strewn about?

Cheers.
LC

[Garza]

Hello Garza. Would not such a violent slam cause the cachous to be strewn about?

Cheers.
LC

Hey lynn.

Dr. Blackwell at the inquest stated:

The packet was lodged between the thumb and the first finger, and was partially hidden from view.

This would indicate that she was holding the opening of packet where the thumb and first finger would be, effectively closing the opening of the packet as to not let any escape as you might do with a bag of sweets.
If Liz was holding the bag firmly enough, and if she was brought down to the ground quickly enough by surprise, she would not have time to open her hands to break her fall (as everyone does instinctively).

Imagine running along a pavement and you step on to a patch of black ice, you are disorientated so quickly you don't have a time to break your fall with your open palms and you land on your shoulder blades. Its the same thing.

Consider the small frame of Liz it would not take a averagely stong man to take her down in surprise.

[Fisherman]

Well, Garza, the only flaws I can find in your theory are these:

1. No sound was recorded from the encounter between Liz and her killer, and it seems you are presenting quite a hefty brawl here.
2. Lizīclothes all seemed totally undisturbed when found, implicating that she had been "laid down gently", according to PC Lamb.
3. The border of her scarf was frayed, and so it was stretched in the split second when the killer cut her neck.
4. You have her holding on to that packet of cachous through lots of things; being thrown violently to the ground, having a hand placed over her mouth, turning herself into a foetal position and having her neck cut. Why would/how could she accomplish that?
5. If the bruising came about the way you suggest, then she hit the ground with her collarbones and chestbone first. Even a japanese sumofighter would have difficulties to produce such a throw.

Those are the objections that leap to mind to begin with. Apart from them, Iīm fine with the scenario.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Frank!

I did some experimenting with my chequered silk scarf, following your suggestion. You wrote:

"I’ve always imagined Stride’s murderer to grab the loose ends (hanging down from the knot) with his left hand from behind to pull her backwards. That way, the knot would shift to the left while tightening at the same time, just as the scarf would tighten."

The result of my efforts was that it was shown that grabbing the loose ends of the scarf in one hand and pulling would produce neither a tightening of the knot, nor any tightening of the scarf itself ...

... but if you pull on just the one loose end, you can actually tighten the knot somewhat. And if you pull on such a loose end, the scarf-knot may well move to the side of the neck, just as you suggest, furthermore, it may be stopped there by the friction of the scarf against the neck - but the scarf itself will not be drawn tight by it.

Moving on, where are you suggesting that the loose ends were situated from the outset? At the front of Strides neck? If so, why would the killer stretch all the way around the neck to grasp for them?

The scarf business presents murky waters. But to me, the best bet remains that the garotting grip was used, and that Stride wore her handkerchief rather tight from the outset. If it was really only of handkerchief size, then itīs length may only have allowed for a tight fashion of wearing. And, of course, if that was the case, then there would not have been much of any loose ends to pull by.

On the language issue: Would it not make a world of difference if Blackwell said "I could not SAY that" or "I could not say THAT"? Just a question - being Swedish, my grasp of the British language leaves a few things to desire, Iīm afraid ...

The best,
Fisherman

[Tom_Wescott]

Frank!

Who's Frank?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fisherman]

Frank van Oploo, Tom. He posted a page back.

...correction, TWO pages back, earlier today.

The best,
Fisherman

[Tom_Wescott]

Oh, okay. I didn't see him. Was wondering if that was Garza's first name. Frank Garza has a ring to it, does it not?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Garza]

Well, Garza, the only flaws I can find in your theory are these:

Hello Fisherman, just the five lol? I'm new to this so bare with me. Thanks for your feedback!

1. No sound was recorded from the encounter between Liz and her killer, and it seems you are presenting quite a hefty brawl here.

And no sound would be heard. There would be no brawl. The killer came from behind, grabbed the back of the collar with the right, cover her mouth with the left. Slam her to the ground while still holding her collar and mouth, he lets go of the collar when she is about to hit the ground, grabs the knife with the right. Liz tries to roll up in a ball instictively expecting a punch, instead a knife rips open her windpipe.

2. Lizīclothes all seemed totally undisturbed when found, implicating that she had been "laid down gently", according to PC Lamb.

Oh can one distinguish clothing patterns by how fast they fall? Not saying he was wrong, but I think he meant she wasn't dragged. For example, go and lay on the ground, get someone take a photo of you, then while standing up just let yourself fall to the ground on her back without resistance, again take a photo, will you see a difference, im not sure.

3. The border of her scarf was frayed, and so it was stretched in the split second when the killer cut her neck.

That is an interesting one, I will give you that. Unless the scarf teared slightly when he grabbed it? It would mean the killer would have to grab the scarf while slicing her throat. But then why the silence? Nothing was heard. And the doctor arriving said she was definitely not cut while she was upright. And:

I examined the clothes, but found no blood on any part of them.

How can you cut someone's throat and not have blood on their clothes unless they are lying down or are upside down? She was lying down.

4. You have her holding on to that packet of cachous through lots of things; being thrown violently to the ground, having a hand placed over her mouth, turning herself into a foetal position and having her neck cut. Why would/how could she accomplish that?

It would only take 3/4 seconds at the most to do what I suggest happened.

5. If the bruising came about the way you suggest, then she hit the ground with her collarbones and chestbone first. Even a japanese sumofighter would have difficulties to produce such a throw.

Nah her back would have took the brunt of the force, not her shoulders or collarbone.

Maybe she got those by being pushed to ground by a man prone to shouting Lipski?

Those are the objections that leap to mind to begin with. Apart from them, Iīm fine with the scenario.

The best,
Fisherman

Like I said, I'm only new to this so I might be wrong. I have to say I think this is a JtR killing, like all others, not a squeak was made, even though there were people all around - like all the others. This guy knew how to kill a person, and kill them quick and quietly - deadly man. Wouldn't be surprised if JtR ever was in the military tbh.

[Garza]

Oh, okay. I didn't see him. Was wondering if that was Garza's first name. Frank Garza has a ring to it, does it not?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

lol, not quite

[Fisherman]

Tom W:

"Frank Garza has a ring to it, does it not?"

Tom, Garza does not need any "Frank" to get a ring to his name.

The best,
Fisherman

[Tom_Wescott]

You calling him dingy, Fisherman?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fisherman]

Garza writes:

"There would be no brawl ... Slam her to the ground"

Slamming people to the ground IS a brawl, Garza!

"can one distinguish clothing patterns by how fast they fall?"

To some extent, yes. People who are slammed to the ground do not end up tidy-looking clothingwise.

"Not saying he was wrong, but I think he meant she wasn't dragged."

What he said, Garza, was that she looked as if she had been laid down gently, and that she seemed like a woman resting peacefully or sleeping. The impression of calmness and rest was a very clear one.

"Unless the scarf teared slightly when he grabbed it?"

Nope. It was frayed, "as if by a sharp knife" it was worded, I believe. Not torn, thus.

"How can you cut someone's throat and not have blood on their clothes unless they are lying down or are upside down?"

You cut them during their fall or when they lie down. Those would be the two options at hand, the first one proposed by Dr Blackwell at the inquest. I concur with it.


"It would only take 3/4 seconds at the most to do what I suggest happened."

Ample time to drop or let go of the cachous, Iīm afraid.

"Nah her back would have took the brunt of the force, not her shoulders or collarbone."

Youre spot on there - but that was not where she was bruised. She was bruised over her shoulders, close to the collarbones, as well as on her chest.

"This guy knew how to kill a person, and kill them quick and quietly - deadly man."

That proposition normally makes me ask in how many ways a man can cut a womans throat without being considered knowledgeable in the art of killing. Please keep in mind that thre was a third killing on the night of the so called "double event", and in that case a man killed his wife by cutting her neck almost to the bone. But nobody has ever proposed that he was someone who knew how to kill, that he was a deadly man. In fact, it would seem that he had never killed before, so maybe we should put it all down to sheer luck?

"I'm new to this so bare with me."

Willingly and happily, Garza! All of us out here were once new to Ripperology.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Tom W asks:

"You calling him dingy, Fisherman?"

To fishermen, a dingy is a nice little boat, kept to save your life should trouble arise. But no, I am not calling him dingy..!

The best,
Fisherman

[Adam Went]

Lynn:

Reliable with respect to what? It merely takes account of the major desiderata in the case--scarf with tightened knot to the left, body position, lack of struggle, cut throat, lack of arterial spray, cachous intact.

Dare I ask how you would carry out such a test to make it as accurate as possible? How do you know the scarf wasn't moved by the killer after he strangled her to allow easier access to her throat? Likewise, how do you know the body wasn't moved? Variables, lots of them. When I was studying science way back in high school, we got lectured about variables all the time, and whenever conducting an experiment, had to cover all the bases to make sure that an accurate result was reached by combining the evidence at the end of all the tests. Will you be doing the same thing? Because you'd probably have to do the same test dozens and dozens of times to reach such a conclusion - and it doesn't help if you're already biased towards one opinion or the other before you start because then you see the 'evidence' in the light you want to see it in.

What evidence? I see no evidence of strangling.

Hands placed over the top of said scarf which therefore avoided abrasions/bruising?

Change your mind?

Hmm.....nah. Sorry.

Fisherman:

Strange, then, that he could see the scarf, donīt you think? And once he had grabbed that, he could have been blind - he would still be able to locate the neck. Itīs ususally where the scarf is.


Not strange at all. Presuming Liz was approached on the street where the light was slightly better, before being taken into the passageway, it would have been clear to the killer that she was wearing a scarf - alternatively, he may have placed an arm around her or on her shoulder or something, as we know happened in a couple of the other murders from the witness descriptions, and therefore felt that she was wearing a scarf. It's different once he was in the passageway and it was really was more or less pitch black darkness.

Cheers,
Adam.